Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world

[rakarskiy]

@Rakarkiy,

Please, let me ask you a simple question...Have You replicated Figuera's Generator Successfully?

If so, could You please show your videos where you are doing it successfully?...showing it self powering itself?

Because I DO have tried myself to replicate Figuera's Device, many, many ways, for a very long time, all possibilities...

and I DO have the proof, for years...in You Tube Videos...

Your assumption, will not make any difference, Rakarskiy...

if that would be the "secret" to a "successful" Figuera..., then show it working!!


Ufopolitics

Ufopolitics, I don't want to prove anything to anyone. Don't like it, don't listen. My rule that everything we invent was invented by others is confirmed even in my case: by Figer, by Tesla, by many others, and now by Holcomb. I saw in Holcomb what I developed on my RAGEN - rotover without copying anyone. If you see, all questions will disappear.

[Ufopolitics]

Ufopolitics, I don't want to prove anything to anyone. Don't like it, don't listen.

...


Rakarskiy, basically you wrote:

all other Replicators of Figuera failed because of NOT winding inside a core gap..."

It would obviously mean that "You got it right"...that "You did it right"...and successfully...

And it happens, that I was one of those "Failed Replicators of Figuera"...

so, I am asking you...could you please, Enlighten Us All, failures, miserable mortals, that could not get it right!!

LOL


Freaking funny as sh*t



Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Hi Rakarskiy

I read with interest what you said about the Holcomb technology. You linked it to Figuera's patent, which seems relevant, but very worrying since after more than a century we do not have any machine working according to Figuera's plan today. So won't we have any with Holcomb in 2122 either?

The problem with Holcomb is that in his patent, the energy is claimed to come from electron spin. So by talking about spin, Holcomb is relying on academic science to justify the extra energy produced.

If one considers the academic science incorrect, then the explanation by the spin does not make sense, and only the demonstration of the extra-energy by facts that everyone can observe and reproduce, is indispensable.

If we consider academic science correct, then :
- the imputation of extra-energy to electron spin is not valid since its mathematical formalism forbids the creation of energy in a closed system.
- or the imputation of extra-energy to the electron spin is valid but then the spin is only an intermediary capturing energy from elsewhere, so that Holcomb's explanation is incomplete and the real source of energy remains unknown
- or Holcomb ignores the source of the extra-energy, he just observes it, and he provides a bogus explanation in order to justify the extra-energy and make it credible for patentability and investors.

But what I see everywhere about Holcomb are digressions on magnetic fields and their couplings, based on the known rules of electromagnetism, which in no case can give rise to extra-energy.

As with all claims of overunity, there is a need to check the facts first. The problem with Holcomb's machine is that it is already an industrial machine, without proof of concept, i.e. without a simple setup based on the underlying principle involved in the phenomenon.
What would that principle be? What could be the elementary setup that would demonstrate it, even if it only produces a few mW?

I think this is the main interesting question. What is your analysis?

Excellent Post!!

How could I have missed it?

Figuera and Holcomb are completely different technologies...yes, both "move" the magnetic field itself (no cores, no coils movement)...and that is about the only thing in common they have.

1-Holcomb supposedly rotates field.
2-Figuera moves Field back and forth, by stepping up and down its currents by using resistors or inductors.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[rakarskiy]

Excellent Post!!

How could I have missed it?

Figuera and Holcomb are completely different technologies...yes, both "move" the magnetic field itself (no cores, no coils movement)...and that is about the only thing in common they have.

1-Holcomb supposedly rotates field.
2-Figuera moves Field back and forth, by stepping up and down its currents by using resistors or inductors.


Regards


Ufopolitics

Technology in sight. Once again I want to note on the example of a synchronous electric generator for a car, with field excitation from an electromagnet. To obtain the appropriate electromotive force in the stator slots, the electromagnet creates a magnetic flux with a corresponding magnetic induction. Mechanical force is needed to rotate the resulting magnetic field from the rotor. The conductor and the stator are stationary, the magnetic saturation of different poles moves inside the stator. Thus, there is no evidence that mechanical energy is converted into EMF. EMF in phases is a magnetic flux that changes with time. The wire is inside the core.

The maximum excitation current of the electromagnet is 5A, with an on-board network voltage of 12V. The maximum excitation power is 72 watts. The maximum output power of the generator is 1500 watts. What does it mean that the electromagnet created the corresponding magnetic flux (magnetic induction) to form an EMF, as a result of which, when the circuit is closed to the load, we have a current for 1500 watts of power. Do you explain this by the mechanical force of the drive?

The whole problem is that all researchers (independent), before doing, skip the design stage by parameters. Do you know the dimensionality of the magnetic induction in the stator slot when the field is rotated by switching electromagnets in your armature?

https://rakatskiy-blogspot-com.translate.goog/2018/12/permanent-magnet-constant-device.html?view=flipcard&_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp#!https://rakatskiy.blogspot.com/2018/12/permanent-magnet-constant-device.html

[Ufopolitics]

Technology in sight. Once again I want to note on the example of a synchronous electric generator for a car, with field excitation from an electromagnet. To obtain the appropriate electromotive force in the stator slots, the electromagnet creates a magnetic flux with a corresponding magnetic induction. Mechanical force is needed to rotate the resulting magnetic field from the rotor. The conductor and the stator are stationary, the magnetic saturation of different poles moves inside the stator. Thus, there is no evidence that mechanical energy is converted into EMF. EMF in phases is a magnetic flux that changes with time. The wire is inside the core.

The maximum excitation current of the electromagnet is 5A, with an on-board network voltage of 12V. The maximum excitation power is 72 watts. The maximum output power of the generator is 1500 watts. What does it mean that the electromagnet created the corresponding magnetic flux (magnetic induction) to form an EMF, as a result of which, when the circuit is closed to the load, we have a current for 1500 watts of power. Do you explain this by the mechanical force of the drive?

The whole problem is that all researchers (independent), before doing, skip the design stage by parameters. Do you know the dimensionality of the magnetic induction in the stator slot when the field is rotated by switching electromagnets in your armature?

https://rakatskiy-blogspot-com.translate.goog/2018/12/permanent-magnet-constant-device.html?view=flipcard&_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp#!https://rakatskiy.blogspot.com/2018/12/permanent-magnet-constant-device.html

@Rakarskiy,


The worst example about generation of Energy in a typical Rotary Generator...is to cite a "Car Alternator"...

These things require so much torque, that only being attached to a car Engine will function properly...

Besides its arrangement of the Exciter is a waste of flux galore!!

I mean, look at it again!!...the Field is Static, however Poles are REDIRECTED to each upper-lower Solid Steel Rotor with tooth design...

Even the shaft of the Alternator gets magnetized!!

If it produces 1500 Watts is due all about Amperage...it needs around 200  to even 600 Amps torefil the battery after a few attempts to start the car...just because the Starter Motor requires around that much!!

It only produces from 12-14V Max...the rest is amperage to reach the 1500W...

And by the way, post above was not directed to you, but the guy who posted it originally did ask you to "analyze" the Holcomb Design...

It is a waste!!...only good to keep the 12V battery charged...




Ufopolitics